Why We Are Losing

While it's a matter of perspective as to whether we are slowly winning or losing our battle against TPTB, I do firmly believe the odds are stacked up against us. Yes, those of us not part the cabal highly outnumber those who are and it seems that more and more people are becoming more aware of the nature of the world around them.

Still, one key factor inhibits our ability to win this fight: our sense of morality. When I use the word 'morality' in this context, I am including not only religious and societal beliefs, but also the individual and collective conscience, political correctness, intuition, feelings of guilt/regret and the belief that our actions here carry spiritual consequences.

No doubt some will say that ultimately we cannot lose because 'love' triumphs 'fear' in the end. But isn't that just another form of control to keep us enslaved inside the matrix? Think about it. If you are in a war against an enemy that has no conscience, guilt, regret, no fear of ridicule or spiritual consequences, whose chief concerns are the accumulation of power, wealth and influence, how can you win if your adversary is not bound by the same moral constraints as you are?

Being a good person, doing the right thing, serving others, considering the feelings of others and listening to one's conscience are all metaphorical confines that prevent us from overpowering our captors because they are factors our captors don't even need to consider.

"Stooping to their level to win" might seem 'immoral' to many, but it might be the only way to win. Of course, some people will consider my views to be that of a cold, self-centred and narcissistic egomaniac. Before you label me as such, THINK deeply about the topic and the logic of what I am saying.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

But if you assimilate, aren't you one of them then?

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: Dark Ghost

But if you assimilate, aren't you one of them then?

Haha. No.

We're both ants. We are worker drones. They the Queen.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

You're right, you will lose if you try to play their game.

So don't play their game - just go do good work.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

But if you become as evil as your enemy, then basically your enemy wins, for then both sides are ushering an era of darkness and there is no difference wether one wins or the other.

I say it is better to be moral and risk losing than being amoral. Because the thing is, in the long run, nations which rely on amoral actions to survive always end up getting brought down by revolution of people who are fed up getting abused by the amoral system.

Is it immoral to shoot the wolf that's chewing off your leg? A certain percentage of humans are predators and some of them get undue power because the rest of us aren't so motivated, nor do we want to deal with them. How many of us have had bosses that were so heinous that their staff was constantly turning over, yet they stayed put, barreling through everything and everyone in their path?

On topic but I have hesitated to mention it, but Catherine Austin-Fitts mentioned in a radio interview a few weeks ago that 'if she were elected President' she would have to be given carte blanche to 'take out' 250 people... she didn't give a list but I've been mentally taking stock of that number ever since.

What if a removal, in whatever way you might consider proper, of a mere 250 people globally would result in something approximating world peace and stability? Especially if those 250 may be responsible for thousands or millions of innocent deaths themselves?

a reply to: SentientCentenarian

Especially if those 250 may be responsible for thousands or millions of innocent deaths themselves?

"May"?

Executing people based on suspicion alone (these people "may" be conspiring, or "may" be upsetting peace) resulted in the Holocaust.

originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: Dark Ghost

You're right, you will lose if you try to play their game.

So don't play their game - just go do good work.

That's exactly how I see it. If people adopt the vile tactics of their "enemies", they become no better than their enemy. It's just trading one monster for a new monster. And ironically, this will spawn a new generation of people who'll be against the "new monster", including some who will adopt the same vile tactics and eventually become the next replacement "monster".

That's how the same corrupt system passes down from one generation to the next. And as long as some of us are willing to adopt its tactics, we'll just be maintaining and spreading that same corruption.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

It's nice to see you so passionate about this subject, and so determined to make a difference and see change take place.

However, I think the primary reason "we are losing", is because of the effectiveness of the elitists' social engineering programs, which are dividing people, turning them against each other, and ruining any chances to get a coordinated, group effort.

I will U2U you about this...

"Civil disobedience" doesn't work. That's why "they" are always encouraging us to employ it.

These people are taking over the world. We are at war.

Maybe we should start acting like it.

Of course, it doesn't help when free speech regarding what really needs to happen is routinely stamped out, limiting the discussion to sit-ins, protests, voting, and other forms of political masturbation.

You are losing because you cannot define your enemy, which makes it difficult to fight. It's particularly difficult if your enemy is imaginary and exists only in your own head. TPTB is an amorphous collective noun and all it means is "not-you." Once in awhile you coalesce against some acronym organization like the WTO and protest a meeting, but look what happens. Basically a bunch of young people light fires in the street, break some windows at Starbucks and steal some coffee. In poor neighborhoods Blacks riot and trash small businesses owned by Korean immigrants who can barely speak English, but have proven beyond a doubt that it is possible for non-white races to become successful within one generation, thus begging the question of why Blacks cannot. Their very presence puts the lie to the protest.

The whole movement, from blocking Wall Street to BLM is completely ineffectual. It's not organized. It lacks direction and leadership. It's composed of people trying to fight the Pacific Ocean and then wondering how they could possibly be losing.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

Its the old is the "glass 1/2 empty, or 1/2 full?" question. I propose werent arent losing...but winning slowly...

a reply to: Dark Ghost

I would say a lack of morality is what inhibits us.

Anyone that knows the full story of WACO and is'nt outraged
Anyone that sees the constant abuse and murders at the hands of police and is'nt outraged
Anyone that sees the system for what it is and is'nt outraged

And most importantly those who care so little about others they won't fight for justice regardless of when the injustice was committed. 9/11, Boys town, WACO, MKULTRA, JFK just to name a few. People don't seem to what to do anything till the boot is stamping on their own head and by then its to late for them because everyone will sit by and watch. Those that would of helped already lost when no one helped them

a reply to: swanne

When your talking about officals there never will be a "proven guilty". They make the laws and they and their goons are above the laws.

Its the zombies

a reply to: Dark Ghost

I'm not completely sure about the way you're framing your OP. Are you focusing on the people in power or are you suggesting it's more about Good V Evil in the spiritual sense? It's the 'love' triumphs 'fear' line that confused me.

Have you ever seen the reported statistic that something like 1% of people are psychopaths? Although they represent a seemingly minuscule minority, I wonder if it's possible for them to have more advantage over the rest? After all, they're supposedly cold and calculating and unfettered by the ideas of conventional morality that hold most of us. Might this make them more successful in competition? Would they have the double advantage of seeking to push their opponents down at the same time as seeking more power in their lives or professions?

The other day I was thinking about huge crowds like this one at Times Square on NYE. How many psychopaths are in that crowd if the 1% is true?



There are ~600 elected MPs in England and the US has a similar number of Senators and Congressmen and women.

Again, if the statistic holds true, it doesn't necessarily mean that *only* 1% exists across all environments and professional fields. It's likely that psychopaths would gravitate to certain environments (politics, management, military) whilst being deterred by powerless occupations like retail and the service industry (..or maybe not lol). I'm wondering if there's a chance our leaders have a higher proportion of psychopaths than might be predicted in the overall population?

I wonder how many atrocities are an outcome of psychopathic influences in governments and militaries. Rwanda, Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, Iraq War and the core beliefs of Islamic State etc. I'm not trying to single anyone out in there because there are too many to list.

Psychopaths aren't the killers portrayed by the media. There's even been a study that shows they have a recognisable morality that's several degrees off the conventional moral compass. They can be valuable members of society and fly high in professions we need like surgery etc.

I just wonder if some psychopaths have historically risen to the halls of power and played a part in creating the discord on this planet. That wouldn't be mythologising them as 'evil,' but might go some way to explaining why our leaders often make decisions that go against the 'common good.' The decisions benefit their own arrogance and hubris and these are the traits seen in psychopaths. Who knows??